And now I'm not sure what there is to say, other than I know we have to take seriously the need to engage with those who did vote BNP. It's too easy to judge and demonise them. At least they bothered to use their vote; obviously I'd really rather they'd not used it to vote for the BNP, but that's where the serious and sustained engagement is needed.
In the meantime, those of having to live under Nick Griffin's "representation", can at least say (with Hope Not Hate) not in my name.
on the plus side, at least I found good use for those eggs I'd discovered in the back of the cupboard...
By 
rach, at 10:45 PM BST
Question: Does the use of violence deter the BNP, or increase public sympathy for them?
I know the UAF are already at it, but I know others who would consider a violent reaction to the BNP if they reached a certain tipping point.
Indeed, Britain went to war with the Nazis 70 years ago, which was certainly violent, and if we, like Spain, remained neutral, there's a good chance most of Europe, if not the World, would be living under a 4th Reich "cleansed of" (to use the Nazis words) Jews, homosexuals, gypsies and ethnic minorities. Truly horribly to contemplate, but that was the choice, and I'm glad we stood up to them and defeated them then.
On the other hand, if people were to start violently attacking the BNP (as they did yesterday) then that could provoke public sympathy for the BNP, rather than disgust, and this is counter productive. Imagine if Nick Griffin was assassinated - he would become a martyr of the far-right in the same way the charismatic leader of the Dutch far-right did when he was murdered, and could suddenly increase the BNP vote in the UK.
Those on this side of the argument, and at this stage I am one of them, would argue that persuading BNP voters of the strengths and positives of mainstream political parties contrasted with those of the BNP, is far more effective at weakening the BNP - rather than resorting to violent attacks.
However, there is a point, and God forbid we reach it - where the BNP reach a certain critical mass in supporters, MPs, councils, etc. Even as an opposition or minority government (as in 1933), the far-right can simply take over the state in one large step, crush their opponents, and close down democracy. At this point they would control the armed forces, the police and state sanctioned use of violence - and it is then that we are almost powerless to stop them.
But would a violent attack on the BNP before we reached this tipping point actually work?
In a youth club in Northenden this week, 14 year old boys were openly admiring the BNP success and drawing BNP slogans and symbols on paper. The local Rector tried to reason with them, but they were having none of it. I'm thinking of getting a veteran in to talk to them, to remind them of the horrors of WWII in the hope that they would see sense, but many veterans are now very frail and few and far between.
My greatest fear is that their increasingly lonely and weak voices fall on deaf ears when they still say, 65 years on, "Never again."
By Cllr Martin Eakins, at 9:11 AM BST
Interesting article in this week's Church Times:
http://www.churchtimes.co.uk/content.asp?id=76526
Scroll down to the Simon Jenkins piece about when he interviewed N1ck Gr1ff1n and his thoughts on the balance between publicity and, well, publicity.
By Rob (the ergonomist)., at 3:39 PM BST